The precautionary principle and EMF: implementation and evaluation

The precautionary principle, a recommendation to consider action to avoid a possible harm even if it is not certain to occur, is variously defined and interpreted. We present a range of definitions with an emphasis on their requirements for strength of evidence of harm and for actions to be taken. We describe the variety of approaches that have been adopted in developing policy to address the issue of possible health effects of electric and magnetic fields (EMF) in the face of scientific uncertainty. Further, we discuss specific aspects of scientific uncertainty regarding EMF health risks particularly relevant to the development of precautionary principle policy. We define and discuss prudent avoidance and other unique features of applications of the precautionary principle to EMF. We conclude with examples from EMF policy decisions of risk tradeoffs that need to be considered in developing any precautionary principle policy, and provide recommendations for better ways to define and implement the precautionary principle.     

The influence of the precautionary principle on science-based decision-making: questionable applications to risks of radiofrequency fields

The precautionary principle, recognized by the European Commission as a 'full-fledged and general principle of international law,' has been advanced as a paradigm for response to potential risks to the environment or health when scientific data are uncertain. But lacking the elements and operational qualities that characterize principles that have proven useful in law, politics, science, and ethics, the precautionary principle lends itself to regulation based on the perception of a threat or fear itself. In the absence of scientific evidence for risk, recent application of the precautionary principle to questions about radiofrequency electromagnetic fields of cellular telephones and cellular telephone base stations has produced wasteful and misguided regulations and questionable advice to the public. The formation of scientific 'fire brigades' is suggested for rapid acquisition of targeted scientific data needed so that precautionary policies on technologically driven issues can be based on quantitative risk assessment.     

Obituary

The environmental risk associated with genetically modified organisms (GMO) implies that new approaches to risk assessment, risk management and risk communication are needed. In this paper we discuss the role of the precautionary principle in policy responses to GMO risk. We first discuss application of the criteria in the European Environment Agency report “Late lessons from early warnings: The precautionary principle 1896–2000” to environmental GMO risk, with focus on crop plants. Moreover, we discuss Bayesian analysis in the context of improving the informational basis for decision‐making under uncertainty. Finally, environmental uncertainties are intertwined with economic uncertainties. Providing incentives for improved risk assessment, risk management and risk communication is crucial for enhancing environmental and social responsibility and thereby facilitate implementation of precautionary approaches. We discuss environmental and social screening of companies as an example of how such incentives can be provided.     

Payout Policy and Tax Deferral

Equilibrium in the standard finance model implies that value-maximizing firms make taxable equity payouts, even when deferral effectively allows complete tax escape. Since tax deferral and consumption deferral are inherently jointly supplied goods, an excess aggregate supply of future consumption would result if firms followed conventional wisdom and adopted low or zero payout policies to capture tax deferral benefits. The market provides incentives for firms to supply both taxable payouts and capital gains by overriding any tax deferral advantage, just as it provides incentives for equity financing by overriding the corporate tax advantage of debt in “Debt and Taxes.”     

The precautionary principle: an 'unprincipled' approach to biotechnology regulation

A tenet of administrative law, particularly in the United States, is that regulators must base their decisions on 'intelligible principles' to provide consistency, predictability, transparency and accountability. The precautionary principle, which purports to provide a new decision rule for making environmental decisions under conditions of uncertainty, fails to provide such an intelligible principle for making decisions. The precautionary principle is ambiguous on the use of the two major criteria currently used to make environmental decisions - significant risk and cost-benefit balancing - yet offers no new specific decision criteria in their place. The second fundamental problem with the precautionary principle is that it is based on the unsubstantiated premise that the current regulatory system is insufficiently protective. The current system already tends to err on the side of the safety, as it should, but the relevant question is just how precautious should we be? As illustrated by the example of genetically modified organisms, the prudent level of precaution depends on factors such as the magnitude, distribution and uncertainty of risks, the extent of exposure, and the trade-offs and lost benefits in foregoing the risk. These are precisely the factors that are considered under the current risk-based approach, which the precautionary principle seeks to replace.     

Choosing between precautions for nanoparticles in the workplace: complementing the precautionary principle with caring

Workers who develop and use nanoparticles are on the front line of exposure to the purported risks of nanoparticles. Employers have a legal duty to protect their employees against any work-related harm. However, it is difficult to perform the required risk assessment and management when dealing with uncertainty. Risk ethicists have therefore argued for using the precautionary principle to guide such decisions on uncertain risks. In this paper, I argue that if we want to make use of innovative products, such as nanomaterials, but lack the knowledge and shared standards for choosing between protective measures, the precautionary principle is underdetermined. For the use of nanoparticles in working environments, there are several guidelines that suggest different precautionary strategies for dealing with their purported risks, but choosing between these guidelines proves difficult in the absence of a clear, scientific, decision principle. I therefore explore the ethics of care to develop a complementary decision criterion for the precautionary principle. From this perspective, the caring qualities of working relationships are key in comparing precautions with each other. I propose three conditions for assessing risk management strategies based on (1) the existence of a mutual concern for employee health and safety, (2) the connectedness and continuity of the relationships between employer and employee, and (3) the responsiveness of employers to employee needs. Using these criteria will support choosing between precautions, by shifting attention from the acceptability of imposing a risk to creating a social context in which the imposition of the residual risks can be considered acceptable.     

‘Someone else’s blood’: directed blood donation for neonatal transfusion and parental perceptions of risk

In Canada, parents can give blood exclusively for their child’s transfusion, a process known as directed donation. This qualitative study aimed to understand parents’ perceptions in seeking to provide blood for their newborn. Ten parents whose preterm children were cared for in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit of one Canadian hospital were interviewed. The beliefs and experiences of parents with regard to directed donation were analyzed with reference to their understanding of the risks and benefits of this form of transfusion. Interview data revealed that parents had little knowledge or understanding of the medical benefits and risks of directed donation and based their decision to seek this type of transfusion largely on emotional grounds. In addition, despite their preference for directed donation, most infants whose parents were interviewed in this study, for practical reasons could not be given this type of transfusion. This may have magnified risk perceptions of non‐directed transfusions. Parents need to be better informed about the medical risks and benefits of directed donation and the actual likelihood that their child will be able to receive this type of transfusion.     

Application of early risk detection concepts and methods to environmental health. A German feasibility study

Early risk detection is essential for being able to address the most important environmental health risk‐topics in a persistent and prospective manner. In support of the action programme “Environment and Health” (APUG) of the German Federal Ministry of Health and Social Security (BMGS) and the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety (BMU) which recommended that a detection and evaluation system for the timely recognition of emerging risk problems be developed, a qualitative feasibility study was commissioned. The results of this study are presented here and support the development of an early risk detection system based on the insights gained from the investigation of case studies and the differentiation and presentation of a risk typology, methods, tools, and suggested organizational processes.

The study has shown that early risk detection includes the identification, characterization, evaluation and dissemination of information on possible risks as well as the circumstances of appearance and distribution. The goal is the recognition of possible risks in order for risk management to be able to introduce swift and appropriate measures. Consequently, it can also serve as an instrument towards further development of a balanced and structured implementation of the precautionary principle in the environmental health policy.     

Comparing precaution in the United States and Europe

The regulation of health and environmental risks has generated transatlantic controversy concerning precaution and the precautionary principle (PP). Conventional wisdom sees the European Union endorsing the PP and proactively regulating uncertain risks, while the United States opposes the PP and waits for evidence of harm before regulating. Without favouring either approach, this paper critically analyses the conventional depiction of transatlantic divergence. First, it reviews several different versions of the PP and their different implications. Second, it broadens the transatlantic comparison of precaution beyond the typical focus on single-risk examples, such as genetically modified foods. Through case studies, including hormones in beef and milk production and mad cow disease in beef and in blood donations, as well as reference to a wider array of risks, the paper demonstrates that relative precaution varies enormously. Sometimes the EU is more precautionary than the US (such as regarding hormones in beef), while sometimes the US is more precautionary than the EU (such as regarding mad cow disease in blood). Thus, neither the EU nor the US can claim to be categorically 'more precautionary' than the other. The real pattern is complex and risk-specific. Third, the paper seeks explanations for this complex pattern in five sets of hypotheses: optimal tailoring on the merits, political systems, risk perceptions, trade protectionism, and legal systems. None of these hypotheses fully explains the observed complex pattern of relative transatlantic precaution. The paper concludes that differences in relative precaution depend more on the context of the particular risk than on broad differences in national regulatory regimes.     

Policies on Managing Risk in Agricultural Markets

Over the past dozen years, policymakers have largely abandonedlong-standing popular approaches for addressing risk in agriculturewithout fully resolving the question of how best to manage thenegative consequences of volatile agricultural markets. Thearticle reviews the transition from past policies and describescurrent approaches that distinguish between the trade-relatedfiscal consequences of commodity market volatility and the consequencesof price and production risks for vulnerable rural householdsand communities. Current policies rely more heavily on markets,even though markets for risk are incomplete in numerous ways.The benefits and limitations of market-based instruments areexamined in the context of risk management strategies, and innovativeapproaches to extend the reach of risk markets are discussed.      

Five charges against the precautionary principle

We defend the precautionary principle against five common charges, namely that it is ill-defined, absolutist, and a value judgement, increases risk-taking, and marginalizes science. We argue, first, that the precautionary principle is, in principle, no more vague or ill-defined than other decision principles and like them it can be made precise through elaboration and practice. Second, the precautionary principle need not be absolutist in the way that has been claimed. A way to avoid this is through combining the precautionary principle with a specification of the degree of scientific evidence required to trigger precaution, and/or with some version of the de minimis rule. Third, the precautionary principle does not lead to increased risk-taking, unless the framing is too narrow, and then the same problem applies to other decision rules as well. Fourth, the precautionary principle is indeed value-based, but only to the same extent as other decision rules. Fifth and last, the precautionary principle is not unscientific other than in the weak sense of not being exclusively based on science. In that sense all decision rules are unscientific.     

Factors contributing to business actions in response to climate change in Korea

Climate change is a growing problem and has been highlighted as a global issue. Empirical evidence increasingly indicates its obvious potential risks to humans and society. As members of this society, business organizations face greatly diverse climate change-related risks that they must recognize and respond to. However, gaps exist between scientific evidence and the actions of business organizations. Few empirical studies have examined the business organizations’ actions taken in response to climate change in Korea. This paper addresses this critical gap in the climate change literature by examining business organizations’ behaviors and identifying the factors influencing their actions. We employ statistical models to compare corporate climate change actions, and we explain their variations using survey data. The results indicate that despite increasing concerns about climate change, businesses have implemented very limited precautionary mitigation and adaptation actions. In addition, the concerns of the businesses about future climate change impact, organizational capacity (leadership, staff capacity, existence of a relevant division or department), and business size are significant factors with respect to the implementation of climate change actions.     

Technocratic precautionary principle: Korean risk governance of mad cow disease

This study investigates the multiplicity of sciences and the assemblage of technocracy with the precautionary principle (PP) in the Korean risk governance of mad cow disease (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy [BSE]). It conducts a policy typological analysis and a sociocultural analysis of the PP. Korean BSE policies are built on the technocratic PP. This principle emphasizes the scientific evidence of risk, although taking precautionary policy actions against BSE. This principle led to the absence of a total BSE inspection, a specified risk material policy for Korean cattle, a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point policy for beef processing and circulation, and an animal feed ban on nonruminants. Moreover, the BSE debate is not one about a unified science vs. a unified PP, but rather it concerns complex struggles between PPs in alliance with different sciences.     

Procedure for the Implementation of the Precautionary Principle in Biosafety Commissions

In order to fulfil their responsibilities under the precautionary principle, biosafety commissions should lay down guidelines concerning the understanding and application of this principle and work towards an operational procedure. With this contribution, we propose a step‐wise procedure that aims to establish the understanding of the precautionary principle within biosafety commissions and to provide a methodological approach for the application of this principle to specific cases in the course of risk assessment. This approach is based on systematically investigating the consensus view within a group of 15 biosafety experts with the help of sets of checklists. For step 1, we propose a checklist of 13 criteria aimed at defining the understanding of the precautionary principle. For step 2, we propose 4 criteria for the decision on whether or not to use the precautionary principle. For step 3, 11 criteria for the use of the precautionary principle are presented. In step 4, additional criteria for specific applications could be included. In step 5, possible recommendations to decision‐making authorities are proposed.     

Decision-analytic refinements of the precautionary principle

In public decision making about uncertain technological hazards, the precautionary principle calls for prompt protective action rather than delay of protections until scientific uncertainty is resolved. The precautionary principle has a sound basis in decision theory, particularly in situations where the potential hazards are serious and the costs of protective actions are tolerable. This article suggests that the precautionary principle should be refined to address three complications: (1) situations where the exposures to be reduced or prevented may have beneficial as well as hazardous consequences; (2) situations where the protective action itself will create potential hazards; and (3) situations where targeted research investments, coupled with delay of protective action, are likely to support wiser public decisions than prompt protective action. Each of these complications is shown to be relevant to contemporary policy debates about application of the precautionary principle. The usefulness of the precautionary principle in public decision making will be enhanced if these decision-analytic refinements are adopted in formal definitions of the principle.     

A comment on the foundations of the precautionary demand for money

The model of the precautionary demand for money presented by Plessner and Reid (1980) is critically examined. It is shown that households derive no benefit from unscheduled consumption (in the model in question) and will therefore choose not to hold precautionary balances. Positive balances were obtained only by ensuring that scheduled consumption was chosen sub-optimally. However, this note confirms the Plessner-Reid hypothesis by explicitly modelling the benefits of unscheduled consumption.     

Intergenerational risksharing and equilibrium asset prices

In the presence of overlapping generations, a social security system, with contingent taxes and benefits, can affect both asset prices and intergenerational risksharing. In a simple model with two risky factors of production—human capital, owned by the young, and physical capital, owned by all older generations—a social security system that optimally shares risks exposes future generations to a share of the risk in physical capital. Such a system reduces precautionary saving and increases the riskbearing capacity of the economy. Under plausible conditions it increases the riskless interest rate, and lowers the price and risk premium of physical capital.     

美国财产税政策及其优惠机制

财产税是美国州政府和地方政府收入的重要来源之一,美国政府对财产税的税收优惠政策形式多样,并在实践中取得了积极的成效。其优惠政策主要包括减税和免征、“断路器”税收抵免、延期纳税和分类税率等。本文介绍了美国财产税体系及其税收优惠机制,并就如何完善我国财产税优惠政策提出了相关建议。